This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Header inlines.


On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 10:21:25PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > Patch itself is messy as it also removes obsolete inlining for gcc-3.4
> > and older. Ok to clean that up or should I send separate patch to remove
> > all obsolete inlines from string2.h. These would also cause regression
> > as implementations improved a lot and inlines there use only 32bit
> > access without using 64bit capabilities.
> 
> Did the discussion involving 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-01/msg00157.html> and 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-01/msg00270.html> reach any 
> wiki-documented consensus regarding what compiler versions it's worth 
> having any optimizations for in the headers?
> 
These aren't too related to this problem, there is barely any discussion
about performance, its mostly about support.

I would use rule that if user doesn't care about performance by using
obsolete gcc that generates slower code why should we care?

Also as I said before removing many of these would improve performance
as they are obsolete and libcall is faster.



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]